Emotional Perception AI: Supreme Court overhauls decades of UK case law on patentability of computer-implemented inventions

Article|

13 February 2026

The UK Supreme Court has handed down its much-anticipated judgment in Emotional Perception AI v Comptroller General of Patents [2026] UKSC 3 on the patentability of artificial neural networks. This landmark decision overhauls decades of UK case law and aligns the UK's approach to computer-implemented inventions with that of the European Patent Office (EPO), abandoning the long-established Aerotel test.

Background

Artificial neural networks (ANNs) are a core AI technology, underlying many of the recent breakthroughs in machine learning. Emotional Perception AI (EPAI) sought a patent for a system using a trained ANN to provide media file recommendations based on human emotions rather than traditional genre classifications.

The UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) initially rejected EPAI’s application on the basis that the invention was a computer program “as such” and therefore not patentable under Section 1(2)(c) Patents Act 1977. The UK High Court then overturned the UKIPO’s decision, holding that an ANN is not a computer program and, even if it were, EPAI’s ANN had sufficient technical effect to escape the exclusion (see our blog post here). This was reversed by the Court of Appeal in July 2024 (see our blog post here), which found that the exclusion for computer programs was engaged by ANNs, and that EPAI’s invention did not provide a sufficient technical contribution, and so was not patentable. EPAI appealed to the Supreme Court.

Notably, the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and the IP Federation jointly filed an intervention in this case, demonstrating its practical and commercial significance.

Decision

The Supreme Court considered the following key issues.

Comment

This is a landmark judgment that fundamentally reshapes UK patent law for computer-implemented inventions, representing the first time the UK Supreme Court has directly addressed the exclusion from patentability for computer programs “as such”. The decision brings the UK into alignment with the EPO after two decades of divergence, providing much-needed legal certainty for innovators and creating a more stable foundation for AI innovation and investment in the UK.

Patent applications for computer-implemented inventions now avoid the patentability exclusion for computer programs “as such” merely by referring to the use of hardware or other technical means. From a practical perspective, this means far more applications will clear the initial "is it an invention?" hurdle and progress to substantive examination and prior art searching rather than being rejected outright as excluded subject matter. However, while the threshold for being an "invention" is much lower, the real battleground has now shifted to the so-called “intermediate step”, where rigorous scrutiny of which features contribute to technical character will determine what can be considered when assessing inventive step.

The Supreme Court declined to apply the intermediate step test to Emotional Perception's application, instead remitting this task to the UKIPO. Without a body of UK case law or detailed guidance to draw upon, this may create a period of uncertainty as the new test is applied and considered by the UKIPO and lower courts. The Supreme Court recognised that UKIPO personnel and most patent lawyers in the UK have been trained to apply the Aerotel methodology and will need guidance on the new approach. However, practitioners can draw on the extensive body of EPO case law, including the COMVIK approach for mixed technical/non-technical inventions, to guide them through this interim period.

Overall, this is good news for AI innovators. While they will still need to demonstrate that their inventions involve an inventive step over the prior art, they will no longer face the significant risk and cost of having their patent applications rejected at the preliminary stage on the basis that ANNs and other AI technologies are excluded from patentability as computer programs “as such”. The alignment with EPO practice means that UK patents obtained via the EPO, as well as direct UK filings, will all be assessed on a consistent and harmonised basis.

Emotional Perception AI: Supreme Court overhauls decades of UK case law on patentability of computer-implemented inventions

Share this:

Emotional Perception AI: Supreme Court overhauls decades of UK case law on patentability of computer-implemented inventions

Share this:

Emotional Perception AI: Supreme Court overhauls decades of UK case law on patentability of computer-implemented inventions

Emotional Perception AI: Supreme Court overhauls decades of UK case law on patentability of computer-implemented inventions

​

Share this:

​

Emotional Perception AI: Supreme Court overhauls decades of UK case law on patentability of computer-implemented inventions

​

​

Share this:

Emotional Perception AI: Supreme Court overhauls decades of UK case law on patentability of computer-implemented inventions